Document classifications, versioning, revision policy, and custodianship for the Simulation Fidelity Rating framework.
This document defines the governance structure of the SFR framework. It establishes how framework documents are classified, how versions are assigned, how revisions are made, and how the framework is maintained. It applies to all documents within the SFR normative corpus.
The Simulation Fidelity Rating (SFR) framework is a proposed standard for evaluating the structural fidelity of simulation systems used in vehicle dynamics training, rehabilitation, and performance research. The framework proposes a methodology for classifying simulation systems based on their physics architecture, sensory delivery structure, and training validity.
The SFR framework is currently designated as a proposed standard under active development. It has not been ratified by a standards body or adopted by any regulatory authority. It is published for review, evaluation, and comment.
This governance document applies to all pages and documents within the SFR normative corpus. Informative, commentary, and historical documents operate under this governance but do not themselves establish binding framework requirements.
The SFR framework is a proposed standard. Its designations, classifications, and determinations are proposed, not ratified.
All documents within the SFR framework are assigned one of four official classifications. The classification determines the document's role in the framework and whether its content establishes binding requirements.
Content that establishes requirements, classifications, definitions, or determination criteria. Normative documents form the binding corpus of the framework. Any change to a normative document constitutes a framework revision and requires a version increment.
Content that explains, clarifies, or illustrates normative content but does not itself establish requirements. Informative documents support understanding of the framework. They may be cited but cannot be used as the basis for a classification determination.
Content that provides developmental context, historical background, or prior-art documentation. Historical documents are for reference only and do not establish requirements.
Each document carries a visual classification indicator applied automatically to all pages in this framework.
Representative page assignments:
All normative documents carry a framework version designation. The version designation identifies the state of the normative corpus at a given point in time and allows third parties to cite the framework unambiguously.
The v0.9 designation indicates that the normative corpus is substantially complete and under structured review. It has not yet reached v1.0, which requires completion of the canonical definitions, numeric evaluation rubrics, evaluator qualification criteria, and governance authority designation. The framework advances to v1.0 upon satisfying all conditions identified in the SFR Standards Formalization Audit (June 2026).
Version numbers follow a two-component scheme: a major version (whole number) and a minor version (decimal). The "Draft" or "Proposed Standard" qualifier is appended during pre-ratification stages.
| Designation | Meaning |
|---|---|
| v0.x Draft | Framework under active development. Normative content is present but not complete. Not suitable for formal adoption. |
| v0.9 Draft | Current designation. Normative corpus substantially complete. Under structured review. Canonical definitions, evaluation rubrics, and governance gaps identified and in progress. |
| v1.0 Proposed Standard | All normative gaps resolved. Canonical definitions published. Evaluation rubric defined. Governance authority named. Ready for formal adoption by third parties. |
| v1.x | Minor revisions to v1.0. Clarifications, examples, formatting. No change to classification logic, definitions, or evaluation methodology. |
All revisions to normative framework content are versioned. No normative document may be changed without a corresponding version increment. The type of change determines the version increment level.
| Revision Type | Definition | Version Effect |
|---|---|---|
| Major Revision | Any change affecting classification criteria, canonical definitions, evaluation methodology, or determination logic. Includes adding or removing a normative requirement, changing a classification boundary, or redefining a canonical term. | Increments the major version number. Example: v1.0 becomes v2.0. |
| Minor Revision | Clarifications, corrections to non-normative text, formatting changes, addition of examples, editorial improvements. Does not alter classification criteria, definitions, or evaluation methodology. | Increments the minor version number. Example: v1.0 becomes v1.1. |
Each revision must include a documented rationale. The rationale must identify which normative documents were affected and whether the change constitutes a major or minor revision. Revision rationales are retained as part of the framework record.
A change that cannot be classified as minor is, by definition, major and requires a major version increment.
The SFR framework is maintained by its custodians. At the current stage of development, custodianship resides with the framework's originating authors. Formal custodianship arrangements, including the potential establishment of a review board or standards committee, are anticipated as the framework approaches v1.0 ratification.
The framework is maintained by its custodians. All revisions to normative content are versioned under the revision policy defined in Section 4 of this document.
Future review boards or standards committees may be established to provide independent oversight, facilitate public comment periods, and manage the formal ratification process. The structure and mandate of any such body will be defined prior to v1.0 designation.
Adoption of the SFR framework by third parties, including institutions, manufacturers, training organizations, or regulatory bodies, is independent of custodian authorization. Third parties may adopt, reference, or build upon the framework subject to attribution. Adoption does not require custodian approval and does not grant custodians authority over adopting organizations' internal processes.
No certification authority is claimed by the current custodians. Certification, if established, will be defined in a separate governance instrument following v1.0 ratification.
Custodianship is a maintenance responsibility, not a regulatory authority.
The SFR framework is developed in the open. All normative content is publicly accessible. The framework invites scrutiny, technical criticism, and substantive engagement from engineers, researchers, institutions, and practitioners working in relevant fields.
During the v0.9 Draft stage, feedback and critique may be submitted through the contact channels provided on this site. All substantive technical feedback is reviewed by the custodians and assessed against the framework's normative requirements. Feedback that identifies genuine gaps in classification criteria, evaluation methodology, or definitional precision is incorporated through the revision process defined in Section 4.
The framework does not claim to be the exclusive or final word on simulation fidelity. It claims only that its proposed structure is physically and neurologically grounded, internally consistent, and capable of producing repeatable classifications when its evaluation methodology is complete.
Prior to v1.0 ratification, the framework should be treated as a proposed standard: suitable for discussion, evaluation, and planning, but not yet suitable as a formal adoption basis for procurement, regulatory, or certification purposes.
A proposed standard earns adoption through completeness, consistency, and independent verifiability — not through assertion.
This governance document establishes the structural basis for the SFR framework as a formal standards proposal. It defines how documents are classified, how versions are assigned, how revisions are controlled, and under what conditions the framework advances.
No component of the SFR framework operates outside this governance structure. Normative documents that establish classification criteria, canonical definitions, or evaluation methodology are subject to versioning and revision policy. Commentary and informative documents that extend or illustrate the framework do not bind the normative corpus.
The evaluation methodology documents — Reference Test Methodology, Evaluation Inputs, and Evaluation Process — form the normative evaluation corpus alongside this governance framework and the canonical definitions.
For organizations seeking to reference, cite, procure against, or adopt the framework, see the Adoption & Implementation section — covering implementation pathways for seven organization types, procurement guidance, research reference, citation guidelines, and the adoption roadmap from proposed standard to formal standard.
The framework's advancement from Stage 1 Community Review to Stage 2 Independent Evaluation depends on a completed evidence record. The Validation & Evidence section defines the evidence infrastructure: the Pilot Validation Program, the Evaluation Record Template, Inter-Evaluator Agreement tracking, and the Results Registry.
Commentary Document
Content that explores applications, hypotheses, implications, or emerging concepts related to the framework. Commentary documents extend the framework into adjacent domains. They are not binding and must not be cited in formal classification determinations.